Should healthcare be considered a social service, with the very best care freely available to all, or should it instead be a profit-making business? The Proposition – the Government Speakers – began to set out a very strong case for seeing healthcare as a social service: this was the case that would most likely appeal to all. Who could oppose giving free health care to those in need? However, it turned out that the opposition made the stronger case. Making clear how the profit motive is the only driver that can make health care better, and indeed the only means in the past of having made it better. We owe the better drugs and treatments of today to the profit motive. Also, individual responsibility was deployed by the opposition: we only take responsibility for our health if we have to pay for our care. Whilst the government side won the argument of principles, the opposition won the argument of what this looks like and feels in the every-day world, our lived experience: the status quo is good – it looks good, it feels good – because, primarily, of the profit motive. Next week we will be debating whether parents should install spy-wear to monitor their children’s online activity. Next Thursday at 3.00 in Room 9.